Actually, there are quite a few people who wanted real-time micromanagement of units. But I'd think the people "merely" wanting more depth to battles would also be reassured with that quote, as the idea of there being carriers in any meaningful sense implies that there's going to be a system involving actual ship specialization this time.
Hallelujah.
That looks like concept art, not an actual screenshot. Assuming that design appears in the game, I suspect it will look different. Mind you, I don't actually have a problem with it.
This discussion about the Precursor Ranger brings to mind the one change to the system that I think is absolutely necessary: a clearer distinction between ordinary random events and mega events. Some of the "ordinary" events are pretty game-altering, while some of the mega events aren't that significant.
GalCiv3 Forums
On a related note, and pursuant to some of the discussion that's been going on about random events, does the fact that the Dread Lords have been defeated permanently storyline-wise mean there won't be a Dread Lords event in the sandbox game? I assume there still will, but I'd like some official confirmation as "evil super-race suddenly (re)appears)" is one of the more "classic" random events - and sci-fi plotlines for that matter - and it'd be nice to see the event return.
[quote who="Frogboy" reply="16" id="3409531"]But in GalCiv III, the events are XML driven (ala Elemental). Heck, that also means modders can add their own events and it means that events can have a severity scale which means they can be hooked up to a setting UI.[/quote] This is maybe the best thing I've heard about GalCiv III yet. I've literally been waiting my entire life for a game with easily-moddable random events.
As mentioned elsewhere, I'm resuming this in an effort to try and finish it before GalCiv III comes out (also, being based on a completed game means I don't have to wait to get yet another new mouse). Bumping so I'll know where it is when I finish the next post. In the meantime, here's the map mentioned but inexplicably not uploaded in the last "real" post: <img src="http://i1230.photobucket.com/albums/ee492/qrtxian/humans4-1.jpg" alt="" widt
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="256" id="3410438"] I am also wondering if another factor is weighing in on this discussion. Let me start this one by stating my preferences in playing GC: I prefer conquest victories to the exclusion of all the other types of victories available in GC1 or GC2. So could we please start a poll of the sort, "I prefer conquest victories and want tactical battles" or "I prefer cultural and technology victories and do not want tactical battles" or <<< name yo
[quote who="Lucky Jack" reply="233" id="3409951"]1) GalCiv is a strategy game. So is Moo2. The tactical combat is only a feature, not the end all of either game. GC2 had tactical combat, although it was more of an illusion because it was always more of an auto-resolve, perhaps one could say a pseudo-auto-resolve. ... 3) Anything SD does about this idea will, most likely, include a toggle to turn it on or off, just as they did with the battle viewer in GC2.[/quote] &nbs
[quote who="Phazon88" reply="206" id="3408605"]If you have tactical combat, generally it almost always ends up being that player intervention is superior to autoresolved combat. The player feels pressured to fight every single battle himself to get the best result.[/quote] Yeah, that's the problem with the whole "make it optional" suggestion - you can never really balance it. There's actually a few cases I can think of where it's easier to let the computer auto-re
[quote who="TweetyLeaf" reply="179" id="3407681"]Why is people so interested and concerned about this ? [/quote] Again, speaking for myself: because this would be an extreme change for the worse. All of the things you mention - diplomacy, events, planetary improvements, and so forth - are things where there are lots of possibilities for improvement. That can be exciting to speculate on and/or offer suggestions about, but ultimately in most cases it's going to be a matter
[quote who="18Zulukiller" reply="169" id="3407322"] Quoting qrtxian, reply 168 If GalCiv III includes tactical combat, I will seriously consider not purchasing it. Nothing else needs to be said, really. That's a pretty sad attitude to have.[/quote] Eh, I was trying to avoid projecting my opinions onto anyone else. I don't really care about whether tactical combat is "objectively" the best option, or an
If GalCiv III includes tactical combat, I will seriously consider not purchasing it. Nothing else needs to be said, really.
[quote who="Gaunathor" reply="5" id="3406626"]However, there are also a few bugs. One mission in the DL campaign can be unwinnable, because the map hasn't been updated (the win condition is set for a race that isn't on the map). The rest are less severe. Mostly some missing text or a planet hasn't been set to be the homeworld. I fixed all of those bugs (plus a lot more in the tech trees, planetary improvements, etc.) in my mod, so you might want to give it a try, if you
About how long do we have to make a decision on whether to sign up for the Alpha Founder deal?
Part 18: The Arceans' Last Hurrah? The first clue to the way in which galactic events had suddenly altered came at the beginning of November 2234, when the Torian ascension victory countdown suddenly increased by over 20 weeks. Two weeks later, the Enterprise-class TAS Columbia discovered the cause: an abandoned ascension crystal floating in Torian space, obviously once home to an ascension starbase. <img src="http://i1230.photobucket.com/albums/e
Well, I will be frelled. ... In light of this highly unexpected piece of news, I have decided to try to hurry up and finish all of my AARs, including not only this one but the long-abandoned " Galactic Wars " and the never-begun " Epic of the Torians ". Obviously, real life will cause som
Back in the original days of these forums, some people apparently posted AARs in the Game Talk section or other sections instead of in the AAR section (which may not have existed yet). I'm creating this thread to try and make them accessible to anyone who might still be interested in reading them. These first 8 AARs were all found through use of this thread. My very own Game
Okay, I'm not really certain what you're talking about. This is how Kinetic Streams appears in my games: a bunch of vaguely electrical-looking beams all going off together. If it lasts for an extra-lengthy amount of time, it's not something I've ever really noticed.
Isn't that just the flavor of the Iconian/Yor unique weapons, though? They're all a bunch of little weapons being fired off together.
Part 17, continued By the way, here is a link to pictures of the New York class battleship. As 2234 went on, I continued to closely monitor the actions of the Torians and Korx. Though still losing overall, the Korx had begun to inflict serious damage on the advancing Torian armadas. <img src="http://i1230.photobucket.com/albums/ee492/qrtxian/GC2TA_TerranAlliance_136771582
Bumping so I can remember where this is, because I'm going to resume it this weekend.
I have to agree a little with the previous poster, rude though he was: playing against AIs set to "Beginner" mode is probably not going to be very entertaining to watch.
The military rankings are pretty much the only thing the AI considers when you ask it for peace, actually. Though it might offer peace on its own if it's fighting other wars or is just tired of the conflict.
That did it. Thanks!
GalCiv2 Forums